William Blum Believes JFK Was Killed By Conspiracy

[Workers Patrols]

I wrote to him asking if he believed the Warren Commision's report that Oswald acted alone. He answered thus:

"I think JFK was assassinated by some combination of American mafia, Cuban anti-Castro exiles, and individual CIA officers (like Howard Hunt).
BB" [Bill Blum]

[email protected]

His email address is posted on his website: www.killinghope.org

Michael Parenti believes likewise. Check out his book Dirty Truths which has two chapters devoted to JFK's death.

That Kennedy wasn't leftist enough for those on the far left did not warp the minds of rightists who saw him an obstacle for their hawkish policies.

Check out the Table of Contents:

http://www.michaelparenti.org/DirtyTruths.html

[RebelDog]

There is no evidence whatsoever that Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy and masses of evidence that he was killed by Oswald. I hate this idea of Kennedy as some sort of hero, fighting for good and murdered by the establishment, when he was just another anti-working class liberal scumbag. Some people should face the fact there was no conspiracy, no matter how much they wish there was.

[la-troy]

I read this book where they blamed Castro for it. Damn Jackasses. They wanted it to sound like Oswald was Working for the communist and a bag of other shit. But to me Castro stood more to benefit from a live Kennedy.

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by The [email protected] 02, 2007 11:33 pm
There is no evidence whatsoever that Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy and masses of evidence that he was killed by Oswald. I hate this idea of Kennedy as some sort of hero, fighting for good and murdered by the establishment, when he was just another anti-working class liberal scumbag. Some people should face the fact there was no conspiracy, no matter how much they wish there was.
In fact, calling him a liberal is already an exaggeration. He was one of the most hawkish cold warriors to ever be in the White House.

Luís Henrique

[Vendetta]

My dad always thought that he was killed by some anti-Castro Cuban group.

[ComradeR]

Originally posted by Comrade [email protected] 03, 2007 12:33 am
My dad always thought that he was killed by some anti-Castro Cuban group.
You know i always found that idea funny because Kennedy was probably the best thing to happen to the anti-Castro movement. The man was as anti-Communist as they came.

[chebol]

You know i always found that idea funny because Kennedy was probably the best thing to happen to the anti-Castro movement. The man was as anti-Communist as they came.

And then the Bay of Pigs happened, and the guy shat himself, and did a massive turn-around and decided to open channels of communication with Fidel. So maybe not so funny after all...

There is plenty of material that supports an alternative to the Oswald theory. The Cuban government holds that Oswald was framed and other people were responsible for the murder. Their former chief of intelligence - Fabian Escalante - has investigated the matter several times, and written a book on it.

Just because there are heaps of wacko conspiracy nuts out there, don't suddenly start thinking this sick system isn't pack full of real conspiracies.

[ComradeR]

Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2007 09:14 am

You know i always found that idea funny because Kennedy was probably the best thing to happen to the anti-Castro movement. The man was as anti-Communist as they came.

And then the Bay of Pigs happened, and the guy shat himself, and did a massive turn-around and decided to open channels of communication with Fidel. So maybe not so funny after all...
Are you forgetting Operation Mongoose? (also known as the Cuban Project) It came into being after the Bay of Pigs, and it's purpose was to eliminate Castro and overthrow the new Socialist state, during it the US government worked closely with the anti-Castro movement. Kennedy was obsessed with killing Castro and bringing US Imperialism back to Cuba.

[RebelDog]

Just because there are heaps of wacko conspiracy nuts out there, don't suddenly start thinking this sick system isn't pack full of real conspiracies.

Evidence is the key thing and always will be. It doesn't matter who says the mafia killed him or who says it was the CIA or the Cubans or whatever. The fact is, 44 years after Kennedy was killed, no conspiracy supporter has come up with a shred of evidence to support their claims. Some people cannot conceive that a very powerful man was destroyed by an insignificant man, but that is what all the weight of evidence tells us what happened.

[Janus]

We've discussed the JFK assassination numerous times in the past:

JFK assassination (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=46558&hl=Kennedy)
did the Cubans assassinate him? (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=44724&hl=Kennedy)
JFK assassination (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=43253&hl=Kennedy)
JFK assassination (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=38431&hl=Kennedy)
JFK (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=18599&hl=Kennedy)

[chebol]

No, I haven't forgotten Operation Mongoose (or any of the others).

Point is, at the time, who else knew about them?

Anyway, I'm not a big fan of Kennedy Assasination discussions, so I'll leave it here. We are unlikely to turn up any new info anytime soon, so there's no particular point.

[BreadBros]

Interestingly enough Rolling Stone recently did an interview with Saint John Hunt the son of Howard Hunt (a Mexico City CIA bureau chief, organizer for the Bay of Pigs and later indicted as one of the Watergate "plumbers"). Apparently he passed away and left his son a series of notebooks and audio recordings (which you can hear on his website) that label LBJ as the primary conspirator behind the assassination, along with CIA agent Cord Meyer and Lucien Sarti as the 2nd gunman.

The transcript of the tape is:


heard from Frank that LBJ had designated Cord Meyer, Jr. to undertake a larger organization while keeping it totally secret. Cord Meyer himself was a rather favorite member of the Eastern aristocracy. He was a graduate of Yale University and had joined the Marine Corps during the war and lost an eye in the Pacific fighting.

I think that LBJ settled on Meyer as an opportunist, paren-(like himself) paren-and a man who had very little left to him in life ever since JFK had taken Cord's wife as one of his mistresses. I would suggest that Cord Meyer welcomed the approach from LBJ, who was after all only the Vice President at that time and of course could not number Cord Meyer among JFK's admirers—quite the contrary.

As for Dave Phillips, I knew him pretty well at one time. He worked for me during the Guatemala project. He had made himself useful to the agency in Santiago, Chile where he was an American businessman. In any case, his actions, whatever they were, came to the attention of the Santiago station chief and when his resume became known to people in the Western hemisphere division he was brought in to work on Guatemalan operations.

Sturgis and Morales and people of that ilk stayed in apartment houses during preparations for the big event. Their addresses were very subject to change, so that where a fellow like Morales had been one day, you'd not necessarily associated [sic] with that address the following day. In short, it was a very mobile experience.

Let me point out at this point, that if I had wanted to fictionalize what went on in Miami and elsewhere during the run up for the big event, I would have done so. But I don't want any unreality to tinge this particular story, or the information, I should say. I was a benchwarmer on it and I had a reputation for honesty.

I think it's essential to refocus on what this information that I've been providing you—and you alone, by the way—consists of. What is important in the story is that we've backtracked the chain of command up through Cord Meyer and laying [sic] the doings at the doorstep of LBJ. He, in my opinion, had an almost maniacal urge to become President. He regarded JFK, as he was in fact, an obstacle to achieving that. He could have waited for JFK to finish out his term and then undoubtedly a second term. So that would have put LBJ at the head of a long list of people who were waiting for some change in the executive branch.

http://www.saintjohnhunt.com/testament.html

Food for thought for all of you interested ;)

[Raúl Duke]

I thought that President Kennedy did not approve Opertation Mongoose (or was it another anti-castro operation).....?

Well..anyway; they probably approve it later because CIA-backed anti-castro Cuban-Americans (Posada, Bosh, etc) did attack civilian Cubana Air planes. (however, there weren't any "false flag" operations, cia-backed terrorist attacks on home soil which they use to blame on any of their enemies, in this case, Castro.)

Well...I really don't care about dead presidents (or alive ones for that matter, at least not in a positive way).

[RedCommieBear]

Originally posted by la-[email protected] 02, 2007 11:48 pm
I read this book where they blamed Castro for it. Damn Jackasses. They wanted it to sound like Oswald was Working for the communist and a bag of other shit. But to me Castro stood more to benefit from a live Kennedy.
There's a new documentary, Rendezvous With Death (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendezvous_with_Death), that claims the Kennedy assassination was ordered by Castro.

I do remember an interview with Castro, where he was asked about the JFK conspiracy theory, where he denied any involvement, saying something along the lines of, "Why would I order something that would give the U.S a reason to launch a full-scale invasion of Cuba." I can't seem to find the quote...

[Janus]

There's a new documentary, Rendezvous With Death, that claims the Kennedy assassination was ordered by Castro.
It's not really new, we discussed it here over a year ago.

Did the Cubans assassinate him? (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=44724&hl=Kennedy)

A new book on the assassination has just come out, it seems that the author, Vincent Bugliosi, after arduous research claims that Oswald did in fact act alone.

Reclaiming History (http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2007/06/bugliosi_qa)

[praxis1966]

Originally posted by The [email protected] 03, 2007 04:12 am

Just because there are heaps of wacko conspiracy nuts out there, don't suddenly start thinking this sick system isn't pack full of real conspiracies.

Evidence is the key thing and always will be. It doesn't matter who says the mafia killed him or who says it was the CIA or the Cubans or whatever. The fact is, 44 years after Kennedy was killed, no conspiracy supporter has come up with a shred of evidence to support their claims. Some people cannot conceive that a very powerful man was destroyed by an insignificant man, but that is what all the weight of evidence tells us what happened.
While he certainly didn't offer up any explanation for his views, I do think Blum should be taken with at least a modicum of seriousness. He was, after all, a fairly high ranking official in the State Department while Kennedy was in office as well as after (until 1967, to be exact). As such, he would have been privy to a certain amount of classified information that may or may not have yet been released under FOIA.

Fact is, his ambition was to become head of the Office of Foreign Affairs until he had seen so much he couldn't have, in good conscience, gone on working there. I've never read anything where he mentioned specifically what incidents lead to his departure, but in all probability it was the fabrications surrounding the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. However, who knows? Maybe his suspicions of the official explanation of the Kennedy assassination were a contributing factor as well.